Discussion Forum Rules for PublicAgenda.org
We welcome your comments and participation on our site, and we hope everyone will have a good (and informative) time here. We want to create a safe space for people to have their say, and we don’t think a lot of rules and regulations will help that goal. So we’re going to keep things as simple as possible.
Respect. Everyone posting in the forum or making comments deserves respect. Heated discussion is great. But the discussion shouldn’t get personal. There’s a difference between “I think you’re wrong” and “I think you’re an idiot” (or worse). Please avoid antagonizing other posters and keep things civil.
Responsibility. You are responsible for what you post on PublicAgenda.org. Comments posted on the site only represent the views of their authors, not Public Agenda. The fact that a post is on the site does not mean Public Agenda endorses the opinions expressed or stands behind its accuracy. While we will do our best to maintain a safe and sane place to have discussions, we are not responsible in any way for the content of the posts, or any actions you may take as a result of the posts.
We do, however, reserve the right to reject or remove posts that violate the rules, at our sole discretion and without prior notice.
Focus. We know how conversations can meander, but we ask that you stay on topic in the discussions. Off-topic posts may be moved or deleted without notice if we believe they’re interfering with the discussion.
Out of bounds. There are certain things that are not allowed. You may not post messages that are illegal or unlawful, threatening, abusive, harassing, intimidating, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, or indecent.
You’re not allowed to spam the boards (post the same message over and over) or use them for any commercial promotion.
You’re not allowed to impersonate someone else, or invade anyone else’s privacy.
You’re not allowed to engage in copyright infringement.
We respect your privacy, but we reserve the right to report unlawful behavior and vandalism of our site to your Internet service provider or to law enforcement.
Users who violate these rules or engage in a pattern of misconduct may face sanctions, including but not limited to rejecting posts, deleting existing posts or even the entire posting history, as well as suspending or deleting the user’s account. Again, Public Agenda has the sole discretion to apply any of these sanctions at any time and without prior notice.
For more detail on the rules governing the site, please see our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.









Comments
In wake of federal legislation that allows states the option of extending foster care to age 21 and federally funded kinship care, CA introduced AB 12 Fostering Connections to Success Act to take advantage of both federal reimbursements. All publicity regarding AB 12 has highlighted how this piece of legislation will have a significant impact on transition age foster youth. However, when taking a close look at the legislation, I discovered that the act also proposes funding for homeless youth and families. How do people feel about this? Should legislation introduced on behalf of foster youth, be only for foster youth, or should homeless families and youth have a stake as well?
A common reason given to change our health care system is it growing costs. If the costs shown in your chart at http://www.publicagenda.org/citizen/issueguides/health-care is accurate, it appears costs have not risen significantly since 1990. Please clarify the argument that costs are rising.
Terry Kay
Post new comment